Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Hari Menon on April 1, 2013 at 3:45am

Dear Paul ,

      Other than amphibians among aquatics and among land animals no creatures are able to dwell equally well on two physical planes . Land animals cannot survive naturally in the sea and vice versa . Man is also such a species , without accelerating adaptation by artificial means it is not possible . In the science of the study of various species and habitats and in evolution , amphibians or such like species are known as "bridging species'' since they display the evolution of one type into another type . Flying Squirrels and flying snakes are another type of these cross culturally adapted ones. Ducks are limitedly so but tortoises and frogs are more adapted.  This on the physical plane .

Now coming to your question :

Words are meant for another person or there has to be a listener or reader .

If thoughts and feelings are considered (which being more inner than words) it is generally for oneself only. Since its logic is already fully known and so any omissions or any clarifications will not vitiate it. Your intellect will take what is necessary knowledge and reject what is not required automatically and clarifications are not required, unwanted images will be removed by itself and necessary knowledge will be added from memory and intellect etc .There is no listener in this case it is oneself alone , the result is already there and one thinks on the already known , the facts, logic, reasoning and knowledge is already known . One only confirms what is already known or suspected . It is internal and a worthless exercise of absolutely no use .  It looks productive of knowledge but is actually not - one "creates a doubt" and then tries to make it knowledge , that is all . This is achieved by trying to weld wood to steel with water .  Thinking is only fruitful if it results in New and correct knowledge - not doubt. Thinking has to be on something unknown , and new but having a firm basis in already existing body of knowledge . A body of knowledge on any subject is necessary to think fruitfully on it .

Like statistics one has to be careful in what one thinks - one cannot think of hugely disparate things or bodies of knowledge  and hope something new will emerge - no it is wrong , no new knowledge will emerge - Fantasy will come in and science fiction will emerge , or doubts and fears and apprehensions but nothing of worth - it will be either doubt or speculative and wrong or partial knowledge that emerges. Purposiveness and right intent should be there in thinking just as it is in the real world . No actions are done without a firm purpose or a result or use envisaged in the Physical world . It has to be so in the inner world also. 

You have to understand that in order to expand upon ideas known within yourself to another takes much effort and care , it requires putting yourself in the understanding at that point as to your situation BEFORE a particular knowledge  was gained to and to the point where you presently stand in knowledge . the difference is what is proposed to be discussed and that involves the analysis in terms of Intelligence gained . This new position or the a posteriori position is to be employed in explaining the a priori position . So you are talking of a lower point FROM that point itself but EMPLOYING higher knowledge and intelligence gained between these two points . You cannot explain the present position to another by using the intervening experience or knowledge gained- the experience is a process and the result is your transformed status , you cannot become "untransformed" anymore - You are forced to occupy your new grounds of existence .So you have two points in time - a position before the event happened and a transformed position after the event . In between you have the Transformation , which as said earlier is a morphing state and fluid due to the process .So what you can however do is from memory compare the first point before the process and the presently unalterable state you occupy which two are connected by the process which is nothing but the knowledge between two points in one existence . Which we call as Past ,Past and Present . Now if it is the experience that you have to articulate either to yourself or to another , it makes no sense to articulate it to yourself as you are itself and the end product and that is period - why talk to yourself ? only mad men do it since they hallucinate . Now if you want to articulate it to another - it depends to whom and why - was it sought for or is it being given unsought ? If sought it makes sense , if unsought it makes no sense - it is tantamount to keeping a diary and then publishing it to the world - the results are strange in such circumstances we only have to look around us . The desert of Theosophy is more barren than Julius Caesers wife Calapurnia  yet gives us a feelling of holding endless water and fertility . 

The idea is this - the process if described will be found to be pure knowledge . To be literal is to be honest but naively dishonest intellectually . Because the process was not understood properly on an a posteriori basis .One has been negligent and loose to the importunations of the Divine when knowledge was proffered . 

Is it not easy to understand if an aquatic finds itself suddenly a land mammal and understands that it crossed over by a sleight of hand called amphibianism ?

To be literal is what happens when a person cannot comprehend that he has changed forever and there is no going back , and chooses to look on himself only in the mind as transformed while occupying the a priori position . 

Now to try and think out the experience is strange because , the already changed man who is including this experience then chooses to isolate himself and then tries to comprehend the meaning - in a way he distances himself and tries to project what he will be (which he already is ) once the evidence is gained or confirmation is gained . This is wrong it is disrespect to the Self of All who brought this change manifestly in you - you sort of "push" it away and try to objectify the self . So you are occupying a ground of existence acknowledging that despite a change you need evidence of change , and so occupy the older ground of existence . 

A single experience is of use only to one self - for the transformation is effected individually - there is no necessity to articulate it unless sought for specifically by another . In which case he is already knowledgeable . 

What can be articulated however is once the whole gamut of experiences is known to a person - then it is easy for him to be literal - as he has occupied every single point in existence before experiencing and has transformed himself and occupies every single point in existence after all experiencing - so the process is known by him without a doubt as every posssible experience has been transcended and is held within by him. He can afford to give unsought advice as he is a knower , he can also by discretion withold sought for knowledge since he is a knower . Nothing touches him as he describes the process within himself which is the same for every living being . It is universal , only egos will reject it not otherwise . Such a person represents nothing great  or over and above what others are - he knows the process , others are in the process of understanding the process - that is all . 

Write and ask whatever you like , after all it is about all of us , why feel unhappy or despondent that you are helpless ? What is the standard by which you judge yourself ? if your standards are so high ,then it should not be a problem to evolve  as it is already known to you as an idea . Check the standard that you have and evolve towards it - if you are so concerned about it , otherwise just resolve it is not time to write or that you will never be a writer , more experiences will clarify everything effortlessly . Be true to yourself and the one dimension will become multidimension as your thoughts are. 

We have to Edit ourselves nobody must be asked to strain so much as to edit us , there are not that many good editors in the world !!. Literal is when the I thought intrudes one should be literal but not naiively literal !!!

• ▶ Reply